Search age:

Search in:

Experts urge AFL inquiry on tanking

Samantha Lane

The AFL says Melbourne did not tank to get Tom Scully (above). Photo: Pat Scala

THE AFL Commission should launch an immediate inquiry into tanking, lawyer and former league umpire Derek Humphery-Smith said yesterday, following the alarming comments made this week by sacked Melbourne coach Dean Bailey.

Other experts in sports law agreed yesterday that a mere phone call from the AFL's football operations boss, Adrian Anderson, to clarify Bailey's comments appeared to be a grossly insufficient response to such a serious allegation.

Anderson, himself a lawyer, maintained last night that Bailey had reassured him and the AFL's integrity officer, Brett Clothier - who was consulted on the topic - that there had been no foul play.

But speaking to The Age, Anderson added: ''These things are never completely closed … if more information came to hand that did give us the basis to investigate further we would.

Advertisement

''But on the basis of what Dean said, and his clarification of what he meant by what he said, there's not really the basis for taking it further at the present time. But we wouldn't rule that out if further information became available.''

The AFL also pointed to favourable findings in 2009 from the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation, which initiated an investigation into tanking in football following concerns at the time, but was ultimately satisfied that the league had appropriate integrity measures in place.

Lawyers were bemused yesterday by the AFL's response to what appeared to be compelling fresh evidence from Bailey.

''I think it's overwhelmingly necessary for the AFL to conduct an inquiry into what has gone on,'' said Humphery-Smith, an AFL field umpire for more than seven years and now a partner at legal firm Lander & Rogers.

''There just has to be more done to get to the bottom of this because I think too many people are talking about this concept of tanking, and almost with acceptance that it has gone on.

''I would have thought as the keeper of the code the AFL would be furious about that perception and would be wanting to do everything in its power to change that perception because it's gathering some momentum, which is very concerning.''

Andrew Scott, formerly the chief legal adviser to the AFL Players Association, past president of the Law Institute of Victoria and now a principal at Moores Legal, said: ''I think their desire to maintain the integrity of the AFL competition is in the AFL's DNA.

''And it would just not let this go through without really trying to get to the bottom of it.''

''But if all they're doing is what they say they're doing then it's like saying, 'We'll be selective about where we want the competition to be genuine - sometimes we'll do everything we can to enforce it, other times we won't.'

''And that's just unacceptable in any sort of competition, let alone the elite sporting competition in the country.

''They're [the AFL] in public denial but I'd be very surprised if they're in private denial.''

Lawyer Ian Fullagar, a director of the Victorian Institute of Sport who has also served as Australian Sports Commissioner, said Anderson's questioning of Bailey did not constitute an investigation.

''It's not an investigation at all … and given the comments that were made, one would expect a prudent sports governing body to undertake a thorough investigation into what was said and the circumstances that gave rise to what was said,'' he said.

''It surprises me. It's puzzling if this is all they are doing. I would expect they are doing more and I hope they are.''

Paul Horvath, a solicitor and chair of the Sports Law committee of the Law Institute of Victoria, said he accepted the AFL's viewpoint that it felt fully reassured after talking with Bailey. However, he believes the issue of tanking generally requires further scrutiny.

In his departing press conference from Melbourne on Monday, Bailey, who left as one of the most unsuccessful coaches in AFL history but coached at a time where Melbourne landed valuable young talent through priority draft picks, said: ''I had no hesitation at all in the first two years in ensuring the club was well placed for draft picks. I was asked to do the best thing by the Melbourne Football Club and I did it. I put players in different positions.''

Since Bailey's comments, former Demons Russell Robertson and Adem Yze have made leading, albeit extremely brief, public comments that have only enhanced the perception that Melbourne was more intent on winning draft picks than matches at the end of their careers. However, Anderson said Bailey had clarified that the extent of his instructions from his former Melbourne superiors was to merely develop young players, not to lose games in order to win draft picks.

20 comments so far

So What if they TANK.Its a passionatley followed game. The current system gives clubs a chance to rebuild and thus provides supporters hope of something good in the future.But It does not gaurantee success at all.You still have to have good leadership from top to toe to win a premiership.Would we prefer to go back to a system where the powerful clubs dominated the game because of deep pockets?

Commenter

Keclonis

Location

Melb

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 7:58AM

Any inquiry should include Collingwood and Carlton, both of which epitomize tanking.

Commenter

Gaetano-P

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 8:34AM

Until someone takes this on in court (over betting losses) the AFL will do nothing.

The way that the bottom team is rewarded has to be changed. A better system is having the bottom 9 teams (or 10 next year) in a lottery for the priority pick - that way the team finishing in the last gets no advantage.

Commenter

Matt

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 9:07AM

Last year West Coast won its 4th match by round 16 and ensured their remaining matches were losses, otherwise they'd lose the priority pick. In 2007 Carlton won it's 4th match by round 11 and also lost the remaining 11 matches in order to ensure the priority pick that landed then Chris Judd. As an avowed Carlton supporter Samantha your silence on this is deafening.

Commenter

Taras Bulba

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 9:21AM

There is clearly enough fresh evidence for an enquiry by the AFL...but its clear the AFL don't want an enquiry for fear of the repercussions of what and who that enquiry will expose. The AFL as well as the clubs involved will be shown to be complicit in tanking, so don't bank on an enquiry.

In fact, the AFL will do and say whatever it takes to avoid an enquiry on tanking. Why unleash a process that will undoubtedly cost a lot of AFL brass their jobs and careers. What else could they do outside of footy?

Every supporter knows tanking exists, all the coaches know it, and all the punters as well.

Surprising that publicly the AFL continue to assert that it doesn't exist, given Bailey's parting shot.

While Dean Bailey didn't say the word "tanking", he gave us its definition as it would appear in the concise Oxford Dictionary.

Commenter

See no evil, Speak no evil

Location

Sydney

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 10:12AM

I reckon there are several very easy solutions to prevent tanking. Solution 1) priority picks are based on ladder position at the mid-point of the season (i.e., when the lousy teams start to float to the bottom of the ladder, but haven't yet put the cue in the rack). 2) the bottom four teams get the top four picks but in reverse order (i.e., wooden spooner gets pick four, next to last gets pick 3, and so on). 3) Bottom 6 go into a lottery for top 6 picks. Any of these systems would maintain the point of priority picks which is to ensure that lowly teams can rebuild, while removing the incentive / opportunity to tank. Personally, I like option two, because it means that end of season matches between the bottom four teams might still be of interest to their supporters (i.e., win and you get a better draft pick). Of course, the AFL would actually have to acknowledge that is has a problem and it seems it is unable to do that.

Commenter

Aaron

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 11:07AM

Tanking is proof that there are too many teams and not enough good players. I predict the 18 team expansion will reduce interest in the AFL's heartland as it has done in my house. . Really looking forward to GC minus Ablett at Kardinia on Saturday - NOT! Geelong V Melbourne betting before the end of the first half: Geelong $1.00 to win. Enough said!

Commenter

catfish

Location

qld

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 11:16AM

You wouldn't happen to be a Carlton supporter would you Kelconis?

The issue is not rebuilding, which is fair enough. Its about priority picks.In the context that the draft is about the whole competition, how is reasonable (or passionate) that a team can end up with five, six prime pieces of footy cattle after just a couple of years.

I'm sick of hearing about the 'talented' Carlton team of the moment, when you know a major foundation of it is tanking. (How many top ten draft picks in the team at the moment, regardless of Judd?).

I know its a business but these guys would steal charity lollies if it was in their self-interest...It's not passion Kalconis, its bloody open manipulation, bordering on match fixing. As Douglas Adams said, "if it walks like a duck..."

Commenter

Waiting for Gonzo

Location

Newcastle

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 11:23AM

The whole thing could be so easily fixed if the AFL actually cared. Lottery for bottom 8 teams that way no guarantee. Then Carlton don't lose to get Kreuzer, Melbourne don't lose to get Scully/Trengove and WC don't lose to gt Naitanui. Not enough talent for 12 teams let alone 18. Really such a shonky 'competition' I no longer have any interest after 40 years. Not good news for Foxtel or Channel 7.

Commenter

sick of supposed AFL

Date and time

August 04, 2011, 12:24PM

Tanking is deliberately losing a match to get draft picks. It is completely different from blooding young players to give them experience and sending off injured players for early surgery so they are right for the start of next year when you know you are out of the finals race. Sure, they may lessen the chances of a win that year, but it builds the possibility of wins the next year or following years. The real issue is priority picks. The reverse draft should be sufficient enough reward for poorly performing teams.

4 Aug
West Coast coach John Worsfold has flatly denied the Eagles were involved in any form of tanking last year, saying he did his best to develop players without compromising the AFL club's chances of winning.